Currently, the British do not buy many electric vehicles. In 2012 a total of roughly 2 million cars were sold to British buyers. Meanwhile the top-selling hybrid electric vehicle, Toyota Motor Corp.'s (TYO:7203) Prius moved only 13,000 units (about 0.6 percent of total sales), while the Plug-in Prius saw 470 sales -- even more miniscule. In total only 3,600 PHEVs or BEVs have sold in the UK since the launch a £5,000 ($7,750 USD) tax incentive in mid 2010.

By contrast nearly 435,000 hybrids were sold in the U.S. last year [source], accounting for approximately 3 percent of sales. While BEV sales were slow, combined BEV and PHEV sales moved nearly 53,000 units in the U.S. in 2012. These numbers indicate that the U.S. is likely selling at least twice the number of electric vehicles and hybrids -- percentage wise -- as Britain.

A second plank of the proposed platform calls for airfare taxes to be replaced with a more significant carbon tax. The party describes:

[Air passenger duty would be replaced with] per-plane duty, charged in proportion to the carbon emissions created by that journey.

That move is intended to stoke the use of biofuels and cut down on "frivolous" air travel.

One thing such critics of these proposals will likely appreciate is that the party calls for expansion of Britain's nuclear power and natural gas shale exploration/extraction. The proposal calls on cutting legal red tape to increasing use of nuclear and natural gas for the nation's energy.

The plan does call for the expansion of clean nuclear energy. [Image Source: Corbis]

Among the proposed changes would be to allow for fracking -- hydraulic fracturing -- a process in which pressurized/heat water and chemicals is injected into sites containing oil or natural gas in order to extract it. The process is controversial as some have suggested it might cause earthquakes; however, at present the evidence supporting that hypothesis remains far from conclusive. The proposal to drop the party's opposition to fracking does come with some provisions. The party writes:

[Fracking can commence so long as] regulations controlling pollution and protecting local environmental quality are strictly enforced, planning decisions remain with local authorities and local communities are fully consulted over extraction and fully compensated for all damage to the local landscape.

Experts have estimated that 700 million barrels of oil or more a year could be extracted from oil shale in two areas of Surrey and Sussex.

The proposals -- which aim to create a "zero-carbon" Britain (a rather humorous term, surely) might not be taken seriously were it not for the Liberal Democrats' key role as kingmaker in the British government. By entering into a coalition with the center-right Conservative party (while ironically bucking the center-left Labour Party), the Conservatives were able to command leadership of the country, including the role of prime minister, which is currently filled by Conservative party leader David Cameron.

In order to stay in power, the Conservative government must make major concessions to their Liberal Democrat allies, despite having a significantly larger head count in Parliament. Thus as absurd as the idea of banning all non-electric vehicles from the streets of Britain sounds, if the Liberal Democrats pass the proposal, their Conservative allies may be forced to listen.

This isn't quite what it seems. The Liberal Democrats have never held a majority government in the UK. THey are currently a minor partner in the the Conservative-led coalition and that's the best they've managed. They've also lost a lot of support due to backing the Conservatives, so there's even less chance of them forming a future government.

The conference in Glasgow is an internal party conference, as the Lib Dems don't put policies in their manifesto without putting the proposals to a vote of the membership. That's probably what is happening here.

So even if this vote passes, all it means is that this is a policy supported by a minority party who will almost certainly never have the support in parliament to actually pass it into law.

Unless the Conservative or Labour parties get behind it, its going nowhere, no matter what the Lib Dems propose.

I think the Liberal Democrats have always been advocate of nuclear power.

They're a strange old party, the Lib Dems. Practically everyone always treats them as a left-wing party and they often pick up votes from Labour supporters who are voting tactically against the Conservatives. But they're not classically left-wing. Lots of their policies are quite right-wing. But they also have a lot of social policies, too. Essentially, they are born out of the Liberal Party (old school, pre-communist-era opponents to the Conservatives) and the Social Democratic Party (who were a breakaway party from Labour). So they're kind of a mishmash of classic liberalism and modern socialism.

I personally like them as a party. I think they offer a good balance between libertarianism and socialism - not going too far to the extremes. They've no chance of any real power in government, though